A BILL to amend and reenact § 19.2-354.1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to deferred or installment payment agreements; outstanding court-assessed fines, fees, taxes, or costs.
HB1142 amends Virginia law governing deferred, modified deferred, and installment payment agreements for court-assessed fines, costs, forfeitures, and penalties. The bill requires courts to offer eligible defendants these payment options and bars courts from denying them solely because of the offense category, the total amount owed, a prior default, referral to collections, or a lack of payment history. It also directs courts to consider a defendant’s overall financial resources and obligations, allows consolidation of all outstanding fines and costs in a single court into one agreement, and permits reasonable payment terms based on ability to pay rather than the size of the debt alone.
The substitute also adds protections for indigent defendants and people whose only income is Social Security or Supplemental Security Income. It prohibits courts from taking exempt federal benefits into account when setting payment terms, from referring such cases to collections when the court is informed of that income source, and from requiring payments from those exempt resources. For defendants who are incarcerated, the bill requires courts to place the debt into a deferred payment agreement with a due date at least 180 days after release, and it adjusts when the limitations period begins to run. The bill also limits down payments for subsequent payment agreements and removes the need to establish a payment history before driver’s license restoration in that context.
HB1142 would revise § 19.2-354.1 of the Code of Virginia to make court debt payment plans more uniform, more accessible, and more closely tied to a defendant’s ability to pay. It affects courts, defendants owing criminal or traffic-related monetary obligations, and court collection practices by restricting denial criteria, limiting down payments, protecting exempt benefits, and requiring deferred treatment for incarcerated defendants. The bill would also influence how courts develop payment-plan policies and how outstanding fines and costs are handled across multiple cases in the same court.
The bill appears to have broad support in committee, as reflected by its 14-0 vote to continue it to the next session in Finance and Appropriations. The text suggests a policy goal of easing burdens on low-income defendants and standardizing court practices around payment plans, which is generally consistent with reform-oriented support. No opposing votes or recorded committee debate are provided in the materials, so the available record shows consensus rather than visible controversy.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s limits on judicial discretion and its protections for defendants with limited means. Courts would be prohibited from denying payment plans for several reasons that may have been used previously, and they would be required to consider broader financial circumstances rather than the amount owed alone. Another possible point of debate is the treatment of Social Security and SSI income, since the bill bars those benefits from being used to set payment amounts or sent to collections. The requirement that incarcerated defendants receive deferred payment terms after release may also raise administrative or fiscal concerns for court systems and collections officials.